The new improved webform is online now! Residents and representatives can access the form online today.

The Guinness Partnership Limited (202209343)

Back to Top

 

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202209343

The Guinness Partnership Limited

31 August 2023

 

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration,’ for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice, or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman, and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of repairs to:
    1. The back door, kitchen door and living room doors at the resident’s property.
    2. External brickwork and the kitchen and living room windows which resulted in damp at the resident’s property.
  2. The complaint is also about the landlord’s handling of a flood into the resident’s property.

Jurisdiction

  1. What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
  2. Paragraph 42(a) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states the Ombudsman may not consider a complaint which is made prior to having exhausted a landlord’s complaints procedure, unless there is evidence of a complaint-handling failure, and the Ombudsman is satisfied that the member landlord has not taken action within a reasonable timescale.
  3. The resident has stated that part of her complaint is about the landlord’s handling of a flood into her property. There is no evidence to suggest that the resident has submitted a formal complaint to the landlord about this element of the complaint. There is also no evidence that a stage one or two complaint response has been issued in relation to a flood at the resident’s property.
  4. After carefully considering all the evidence, in accordance with paragraph 42(a) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the resident’s complaint about the landlord’s handling of a flood at the resident’s property is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is because the complaint regarding the landlord’s handling of the flood at her property has not exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure. The resident may be able to refer the complaint about the flooding at her property to the Ombudsman if she remains dissatisfied once the complaint has exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints process.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord.
  2. On 5 August 2022, the resident submitted a complaint via the Ombudsman to the landlord. The resident explained that her complaint was about the landlord’s handling of repairs to multiple doors and windows at the property, and the property’s external brickwork.
  3. The landlord provided its stage one complaint response to the resident on 19 August 2022. The landlord apologised for the delay in repairing the back door which was first reported by the resident on 26 July 2022. It also apologised for the delay in repairing the external brickwork which was first reported to the landlord in October 2021. The landlord also explained that the resident had not previously reported an issue with the windows. However, the landlord stated that it would arrange for its service manager to inspect the windows. It also explained that it would arrange for its service manager to also inspect the other outstanding issues such as the door and external brickwork and raise the necessary repairs. The landlord offered the resident £200 compensation to recognise its delays in completing the repairs and its poor communication.
  4. On 18 October 2022, the resident requested her complaint to be escalated to the next stage of the landlord’s complaints process. The resident expressed that she was unhappy with the lack of communication and action since the service manager visited the resident’s property on 24 August 2022.
  5. The landlord provided its stage two complaint response to the resident on 28 November 2022. The landlord explained that it had arranged for a specialist contractor to carry out an assessment and recommendation for the back door and carry out the relevant repairs to the external brickwork. It also explained that the pointing and rendering to the rear brickwork was completed on 25 November 2022, however it confirmed there was still some further pointing and rendering to be completed. It also stated that it had ordered a new kitchen and living room door and kitchen window which was due to be ready by the end of January 2023. The landlord explained that it would repair the living room window once all the rendering had been completed. The landlord offered the resident an additional £400 compensation to acknowledge its delays in completing the repair, poor communication, and delays in resolving the complaint.
  6. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and submitted her complaint to the Ombudsman. She stated that her desired outcome was for the landlord to replace the living room window and to complete the other repairs.
  7. The landlord confirmed in its file submission to the Ombudsman that all the outstanding repairs were resolved in February 2023.

Assessment and findings

The complaint about the landlord’s handling of repairs.

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy states that the landlord is responsible for maintaining and repairing outside doors and walls, windows, internal doors, door frames and door hinges. The repairs policy also explains that the landlord would normally repair rather than replace individual elements. However, if the repair was poorer value for money or ineffective, the landlord would replace the element instead.
  2. In addition, the landlord’s repairs policy states that the landlord will respond to an emergency repair within 24 hours. It explains that it will either complete a repair or carry out a temporary repair to make the situation safe within 24 hours of the repair being reported. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy also states that for routine repairs, it aims to complete the repair within 28 working days.
  3. The resident initially submitted a complaint to the landlord in August 2022 about the landlord’s handling of repairs to multiple doors and windows and external brick work. The resident first reported the issue of water getting through the external brickwork which resulted in damp and mould in October 2021. The Ombudsman acknowledges that shortly after the issue was reported, the landlord arranged for a surveyor to visit the resident’s property and inspect the brickwork. However, following the surveyor inspection, works were not carried out to repair the brickwork.
  4. The Ombudsman recognises that some of the delay was outside of the landlord’s control, such as obtaining 3 quotes from different contractors. It is part of a landlord’s normal procedure to obtain multiple quotes if the cost of the works exceeds the standard limit. However, overall, the delay to repair the external brickwork was unreasonable, as it took over 1 year for the landlord to complete the repair. Some repair work to the brickwork was completed in November 2022 and then the remaining repair work was completed in February 2023. Therefore, there was a significant delay in the landlord repairing the external brickwork and resolving the damp and mould.
  5. The resident first reported a disrepair issue with the back door coming away from the door frame in July 2022. The resident also reported that water was getting in through the living room door, kitchen window and living room window In October 2021. The landlord repaired the resident’s door temporarily to make it safe. This was completed on the same day that the resident reported the issue. The Ombudsman recognises that there was a delay in the landlord permanently repairing both the doors and windows. The landlord also failed to contact and update the resident about the delays.
  6. Although there were delays in completing the repairs, the Ombudsman acknowledges that the landlord had to replace the back door and living room and kitchen window. The timeframe to replace doors and windows can be lengthy as the doors and windows need to be measured and sometimes ordered from a specialist supplier. In this instance, the resident’s doors and window were non-standard. Therefore, these items had to be ordered. The Ombudsman recognises that some of the delay was outside of the landlord’s control as it had to wait for the doors and windows to be available from the supplier. The back door, living room door and kitchen window arrived at the end of January 2023 and then, shortly after, were installed in February 2023.
  7. The landlord repaired the living room window instead of replacing it. This is because that specific window was repairable. The Ombudsman would only expect the landlord to replace the living room window if it was beyond economic repair. It was also inline with the landlord’s repairs policy to attempt to repair the window prior to considering replacement. Therefore, the Ombudsman believes it was reasonable for the landlord to repair the window in this instance. However, considering the living room window was only repaired and not replaced, the delay in repairing the living room window was unreasonable.
  8. The landlord has acknowledged during its own internal complaints process that there were delays in completing works to resolve the repair issues. The landlord apologised to the resident in its stage 1 complaint response and stage 2 complaint response for the delays in completing the works. The landlord initially offered the resident £200 compensation in its stage 1 complaint response to recognise the delay and poor communication. The landlord then offered the resident additional compensation of £400 in its stage 2 complaint response to recognise the further delays and poor communication.
  9. The compensation offered to the resident was in line with the landlord’s compensation policy. The landlord’s compensation policy states that it awards compensation of between £250 to £700 for cases where it took the landlord a long time to resolve the issue. The compensation offered was also compliant with the Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance, (published on our website) which sets out the Ombudsman’s approach to compensation. The Remedies Guidance suggests awards of £100 to £600 where there has been a failure which adversely affected the resident but there was no permanent impact. Although the resident experienced distress and inconvenience because of the time taken to complete the repairs, there was no permanent impact as works to repair the windows, doors and external brickwork were eventually completed. In the Ombudsman’s opinion, the compensation proportionately reflected the delay in completing the repairs, and it amounts to reasonable redress in this case.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation, which in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about the landlord’s handling of repairs at the property satisfactorily.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 42(a) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the complaint relating to the landlord’s handling of the flood at the resident’s property is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord pay the resident its original offer made in its stage one and two responses of £600 in compensation if it has not already done so. The Ombudsman’s finding that there was reasonable redress by the landlord in this case is based on the understanding that this compensation will be paid.